THE BONUS QUESTION.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 15366, 10 November 1920, Page 7

THE BONUS QUESTION.

m • STRONG PROTESTS B% EMPLOYERS. AUCKLAND, last night. 1 t The Auckland Master Builders' Association met this morning ' and entered a strong protest against the indefinite terms of the findings of the Arbitration. Court on the bonus question. A point raised by one member and unanimously endorsed was that the builders had occasion to hire workmen for periods of a month or two on many jobs, and v all accounts for many building jobs would be squared before the bonus was made operative. An instance was given of a building that would be completed at the end of January, and on which 60 men * were employed. , The charge for that work had already been agreed upon, and it was contended that the contractor could not possibly surchargte the bonus until he was certain it would be authorised. If he had to wait till' perhaps February before the Court formally awarded the bonus to the workmen, he would have to pay an extra 9s per week to 60 men for three months out of. his own pocket. This would mean. £351, which he could not recover unless he , surcharged the owner on the. grounds that the bonus would certainly be given. Both the Auckland licensed victuallers and the restaurant and private hotelkeepers met to consider the wages bonus. The licensed victuallers met. first and discussed the situation, deciding to - appoint a committee to meet the restauranteurs and botelkeepers. The meeting was private. ' The opinion was expressed by several members that, if the bonus, were adhered [to in the case of boarding-houses, the effect would be to put many of the own.ers out of business, as they could not raise their rates to the public higher than they now are. An agreement was reached that the secretary should communicate with the Arbitration Court, so that employers could appear in Wellington as soon as possible and secure a hearing rather than wait until February. It was pointed out that the employees of hotels, restaurants and boarding-houses are in .:.a . different r> category,.- from most emplojpeesy as they were kept at the employers' expense, and so the increase in the cost of living affect- ' ed them only slightly. A joint committee ! of the two bodies will act together in the case. — Press Assn. i